All these proponents of the system keep thinking in terms of a 1v1. "I counter your off-grid boosted trollceptor with my Cerberus and my cyno alt in a Maulus."

Yes, Dominion sovereignty might not be perfect, but it is a damn site better than the above. The offensive power of Fozzie Sovereignty is completely out of balance. The defender has to be able to defend everywhere, but has no opportunity to fortify or entrench his position.

Some might say, "but the same thing will happen now!" This is simply untrue. For one, in Dominion, the offense has to commit significant assets to stage an attack. Yes, if someone brings fifty supers to the fight, A may have a problem. But if fifty supers come to the fight, A can request help from friendly alliance C and we get a big fight, or a massive blue-ball fest (that at least has the advantage of only being once, not every day). In Fozzieland, if C tries to help A against B, D will entosis C's stuff. And don't forget that anyone who comes to help probably gets Space Aids. Thank you, Fozzie.

Your example is flawed for several reasons:

1.) Small alliance A doesn't hold space in the current sov system. Perhaps big brother coalition C gives them a system (for a fee), but they will never truly own space unless they themselves can bring a huge force to attack.

2.) Alliance A is the underdog, and will lose space against bigger B. So what. They can then attempt to take it back, especially if alliance B doesn't bother to utilize it. Currently, if Big Bad Alliance B takes your sov, you can't do **** about it.

3.) With the 48 hour reinforcement window, Alliance A can call in all the backup they want. It's only a minor change in tactics for them to have an alliance A member in each backup fleet.

(1) Alliance A can hold space in the current system, with big brother coalition C's support. The fee is paid in military service.

(2) Then how are small alliances going to gain a foothold? They cannot. They will get roflstomped by anyone large enough to want to destroy their stuff.

(3) Alliance A calls for backup from Alliance C. Alliance C moves pilots over. Now honorable third parties D, E, and F, join the fun and hit C's space while they are away. D, E, and F risk nothing, because they come from NPC space or low sec. Or from a coalition so large that it can send off a bunch of pilots during prime time.

In short, you will have a lot of stuff burn after this patch. Nothing will be rebuilt. Coalitions will hold the money moons and one or two critical areas where they continue to build supercapitals. Everyone else will get burned out of space in short order. Low sec and NPC nullsec are the real beneficiaries of the new system. The existing coalitions will become larger and more powerful, but 0.0 space on the whole will be more empty.

Unless of course, 800k new subscribers suddenly decide to start playing tomorrow and the PCU goes up to 100k. Which all trends indicate won't happen.

In the current system, there is only one way small alliances hold space: They are serfs to larger groups. They pay with military service, rental agreements, or whatever. But they have NO ABILITY to stand on their own with the current mechanics.

In the new system, small alliances can attack unused systems and break down an overstretched alliances hold. They might not even bother "claiming" the space, but simply live there and continually prevent big alliance form using it. Sure, they might periodically lose there space at the whims of big bully alliance B, but that's no different than now. The difference is they can actually attack sov without bluing half the galaxy.

Are you really complaining that alliance C has to weigh the risks of third partying a distant fight with their own home defense? That's a great thing for them to have to consider, and if alliance A has their space rolled because they can't bring in a big brother to help defend their space, that is also a good thing!

The stats for the T1 module seem pretty good. The stats for the T2 version are completely off. 25km vs 250km, are you high?

The best way to determine who has grid control is by limiting the range on the module. If you've won the fight and have killed/chased off any fleet that actually poses a threat, why should you then give two ***** about some crap sitting 200km off? Restrict the range of the module to 25/30km (if not less), it forces you to slap your **** down on the ihub if you wish to RF it (which is only right).

You could potentially look at a speed reduction while the module is active (on top of the warping restriction). The key feature currently missing is risk - if you want to use the module, you should have to commit to it, and put assets at risk. Currently there is little risk if you can just kite while the 2 minutes run down and then warp off.

The 250km range is a necessity. If they make it a mid range or short range only the meta will be influenced by this. By leaving it at 250km it makes it possible for all kinds of doctrines to exist.

All these proponents of the system keep thinking in terms of a 1v1. "I counter your off-grid boosted trollceptor with my Cerberus and my cyno alt in a Maulus."

Yes, Dominion sovereignty might not be perfect, but it is a damn site better than the above. The offensive power of Fozzie Sovereignty is completely out of balance. The defender has to be able to defend everywhere, but has no opportunity to fortify or entrench his position.

Some might say, "but the same thing will happen now!" This is simply untrue. For one, in Dominion, the offense has to commit significant assets to stage an attack. Yes, if someone brings fifty supers to the fight, A may have a problem. But if fifty supers come to the fight, A can request help from friendly alliance C and we get a big fight, or a massive blue-ball fest (that at least has the advantage of only being once, not every day). In Fozzieland, if C tries to help A against B, D will entosis C's stuff. And don't forget that anyone who comes to help probably gets Space Aids. Thank you, Fozzie.

Your example is flawed for several reasons:

1.) Small alliance A doesn't hold space in the current sov system. Perhaps big brother coalition C gives them a system (for a fee), but they will never truly own space unless they themselves can bring a huge force to attack.

2.) Alliance A is the underdog, and will lose space against bigger B. So what. They can then attempt to take it back, especially if alliance B doesn't bother to utilize it. Currently, if Big Bad Alliance B takes your sov, you can't do **** about it.

3.) With the 48 hour reinforcement window, Alliance A can call in all the backup they want. It's only a minor change in tactics for them to have an alliance A member in each backup fleet.

(1) Alliance A can hold space in the current system, with big brother coalition C's support. The fee is paid in military service.

(2) Then how are small alliances going to gain a foothold? They cannot. They will get roflstomped by anyone large enough to want to destroy their stuff.

(3) Alliance A calls for backup from Alliance C. Alliance C moves pilots over. Now honorable third parties D, E, and F, join the fun and hit C's space while they are away. D, E, and F risk nothing, because they come from NPC space or low sec. Or from a coalition so large that it can send off a bunch of pilots during prime time.

In short, you will have a lot of stuff burn after this patch. Nothing will be rebuilt. Coalitions will hold the money moons and one or two critical areas where they continue to build supercapitals. Everyone else will get burned out of space in short order. Low sec and NPC nullsec are the real beneficiaries of the new system. The existing coalitions will become larger and more powerful, but 0.0 space on the whole will be more empty.

Unless of course, 800k new subscribers suddenly decide to start playing tomorrow and the PCU goes up to 100k. Which all trends indicate won't happen.

In the current system, there is only one way small alliances hold space: They are serfs to larger groups. They pay with military service, rental agreements, or whatever. But they have NO ABILITY to stand on their own with the current mechanics.

In the new system, small alliances can attack unused systems and break down an overstretched alliances hold. They might not even bother "claiming" the space, but simply live there and continually prevent big alliance form using it. Sure, they might periodically lose there space at the whims of big bully alliance B, but that's no different than now. The difference is they can actually attack sov without bluing half the galaxy.

Are you really complaining that alliance C has to weigh the risks of third partying a distant fight with their own home defense? That's a great thing for them to have to consider, and if alliance A has their space rolled because they can't bring in a big brother to help defend their space, that is also a good thing!

So that's the role of small groups, being the sov trolls.

It was better when we though the NPC drifters would do it, they won't get tired

you are doing an unfun activity where neither can affect the other except by refusing to be bored into logging out

that is the definition of a bore-off

"well i performed my unfun maintenance that does nothing except reset the timer on his, what fun"

this is the pinnacle of your argument, that "well its a bore-off but...uh...it could be worse?"

The counter to your "bore-off" is that the attacker spends 30 minutes while the defender spends 2. You'll tire of that quickly and bring bigger guns eventually. Unless you think you want to make a career out orbiting and jumping through gates?

All these proponents of the system keep thinking in terms of a 1v1. "I counter your off-grid boosted trollceptor with my Cerberus and my cyno alt in a Maulus."

Yes, Dominion sovereignty might not be perfect, but it is a damn site better than the above. The offensive power of Fozzie Sovereignty is completely out of balance. The defender has to be able to defend everywhere, but has no opportunity to fortify or entrench his position.

Some might say, "but the same thing will happen now!" This is simply untrue. For one, in Dominion, the offense has to commit significant assets to stage an attack. Yes, if someone brings fifty supers to the fight, A may have a problem. But if fifty supers come to the fight, A can request help from friendly alliance C and we get a big fight, or a massive blue-ball fest (that at least has the advantage of only being once, not every day). In Fozzieland, if C tries to help A against B, D will entosis C's stuff. And don't forget that anyone who comes to help probably gets Space Aids. Thank you, Fozzie.

Your example is flawed for several reasons:

1.) Small alliance A doesn't hold space in the current sov system. Perhaps big brother coalition C gives them a system (for a fee), but they will never truly own space unless they themselves can bring a huge force to attack.

2.) Alliance A is the underdog, and will lose space against bigger B. So what. They can then attempt to take it back, especially if alliance B doesn't bother to utilize it. Currently, if Big Bad Alliance B takes your sov, you can't do **** about it.

3.) With the 48 hour reinforcement window, Alliance A can call in all the backup they want. It's only a minor change in tactics for them to have an alliance A member in each backup fleet.

(1) Alliance A can hold space in the current system, with big brother coalition C's support. The fee is paid in military service.

(2) Then how are small alliances going to gain a foothold? They cannot. They will get roflstomped by anyone large enough to want to destroy their stuff.

(3) Alliance A calls for backup from Alliance C. Alliance C moves pilots over. Now honorable third parties D, E, and F, join the fun and hit C's space while they are away. D, E, and F risk nothing, because they come from NPC space or low sec. Or from a coalition so large that it can send off a bunch of pilots during prime time.

In short, you will have a lot of stuff burn after this patch. Nothing will be rebuilt. Coalitions will hold the money moons and one or two critical areas where they continue to build supercapitals. Everyone else will get burned out of space in short order. Low sec and NPC nullsec are the real beneficiaries of the new system. The existing coalitions will become larger and more powerful, but 0.0 space on the whole will be more empty.

Unless of course, 800k new subscribers suddenly decide to start playing tomorrow and the PCU goes up to 100k. Which all trends indicate won't happen.

In the current system, there is only one way small alliances hold space: They are serfs to larger groups. They pay with military service, rental agreements, or whatever. But they have NO ABILITY to stand on their own with the current mechanics.

In the new system, small alliances can attack unused systems and break down an overstretched alliances hold. They might not even bother "claiming" the space, but simply live there and continually prevent big alliance form using it. Sure, they might periodically lose there space at the whims of big bully alliance B, but that's no different than now. The difference is they can actually attack sov without bluing half the galaxy.

Are you really complaining that alliance C has to weigh the risks of third partying a distant fight with their own home defense? That's a great thing for them to have to consider, and if alliance A has their space rolled because they can't bring in a big brother to help defend their space, that is also a good thing!

So that's the role of small groups, being the sov trolls.

It was better when we though the NPC drifters would do it, they won't get tired

you think small groups will give up? its been 2 years+ and we have not given up...and now we are finally going to have some mechanics that favour our fighting style.

we will grind you daily into the smallest possible area we can force you into.... think of the POCO wars era....x 50

Posted - 2015.03.09 20:52:18 -
[744] - Quote
It seems like the goons story is going from "It's overpowered and we'll burn down null with trollceptors" to "it's a boring stalemate where the attacker wastes a ton of time compared to the defender and we don't like it." Is that about right?

If the limit of your argument is "I find it boring to apply an ewar module to someone for a cycle," well .... it's good to see you have no arguments.

have you ever actually been in pvp? when you point someone, that is part of combat where they are then forced to fight

damping somone will break their lock, forcing them to move and restart the process is a bore-off: you have no possibility of a fight, and instead you are taking turns flipping a switch back and forth hoping the other party gets bored and leaves before flipping the switch back

Acuma wrote:

The counter to your "bore-off" is that the attacker spends 30 minutes while the defender spends 2. You'll tire of that quickly and bring bigger guns eventually. Unless you think you want to make a carreer out orbiting and jumping through gates?

that's a bore-off, and i know it will happen based on how fervently everyone is trying to avoid having to put their link ships at risk of any sort. if these people were willing to "bring bigger guns" they wouldn't be throwing a hissy fit at the idea of the link forcing enough commitment your ship might die

It seems like the goons story is going from "It's overpowered and we'll burn down null with trollceptors" to "it's a boring stalemate where the attacker wastes a ton of time compared to the defender and we don't like it." Is that about right?

Nope, it's the same.. the attacker has advantage.

so moa will end our 0.0 dream, and everyone else will also end everyone else's 0.0 fantasy

It seems like the goons story is going from "It's overpowered and we'll burn down null with trollceptors" to "it's a boring stalemate where the attacker wastes a ton of time compared to the defender and we don't like it." Is that about right?

For the record, the latter position is more that being a picket defense to protect against these things is boring as hell. Which dovetails nicely into the first one.

It seems like the goons story is going from "It's overpowered and we'll burn down null with interceptors" to "it's a boring stalemate where the attacker wastes a ton of time compared to the defender." Is that about right?

They're moving goalposts.

Apparently 1 cycle of an ewar module (e.g. damp, point) is now a "bore off".

In reality, It's PTSD. Time was, a bunch of NPC dwellers in ceptors f***ed up a lot of afktars. CFC's been crying about it ever since.

COPYRIGHT NOTICEEVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.